Until AD 1100, everybody in Egypt are christians, the arabs conquer there and killed many and convert them. Few are left as christians. Now only 10%. Ask any egyptian christians. They need to pay JAZIA to be live as christians. The language COPTIC now only in church. Coptic sound similar to Latin. Abrabs imposed their language, where ever they conquer. They cut the tongue of people, who spoke native language. See in India, moguls made Urdu and make Arabic script for it.Egyptian christians are only real egyptians. Muslim egyptians are mixed people with Arab warriors. War children. Real egyptians are here in USA, you can talk to them, they are nice people no terrorist, brain washed bastards. Go to a coptic chrch and see these people. Same happened in Kashmir. Pandits are the real Kashmiris. The Kashmiri muslims are children of the Kashmiri women and arab invaders. Now they kicking real Indian pandits out from kashmir, and they live in own country as refugees. In the end all terrorist, satanic nations wiped out at the second coming of Jesus. Those good muslims belive him will be saved. Others will go to hell.

I guess you meant 700 AD not 1100 AD. Here's a something along your train of thought.. before 300 AD all egyptians worshipped the sun god "Ra" until a Roman emperor converted to Christianity and made it the official religion, he still persecuted christian egyptians because the coptic version of christianity differed from his. Ra worshippers are the only true egyptians.. any idea where i can find them? cheers.

Paris-Roubaix 2011 _MG_9232.

nojoke

01-04 04:22 PM

Your leaps from me to Pakistan, and vice versa, are getting annoying now. You talk about what my views on Dawood Ibrahim are in one sentence, and in the next you conclude that that shows something on the part of Pakistan.

Now, for the last time, I personally think that it would be beneficial for Pakistan to investigate and get to the bottom of the Bombay incident, and use it as an opportunity to further build public opinion in Pakistan against the militants and the jihadists. (Sadly, I don't see that happening.) The perpetrators of Bombay should be tried for treason for attempting to start a war with India. To me, that is more important, than Masood Azhar, and Dawood Ebrahim, and the past.

Again, that is my personal opinion on what is important. You are more than welcome to disagree with it. But don't suggest that what I think proves something about official Pakistani policy.

See you go round in circles. You ask specifics, when cornered you move away from specifics. How many times do we need to start again? No body is going to be caught and there is going to be another attack in India and then the Bombay will become the past and we need to forget the past and we have to start all over again. There has been plenty of 'opportunities' in the past and they all ended in the same way. There will opportunities in the future and they will end the same way. There is only one way the opportunities can be meaningful - 'stop pretending to be sleeping'.

2011 Paris-Roubaix 2011

Paris-Roubaix 2011 Johan

krishna.ahd

01-06 03:41 PM

When (so called) indian leaders will learn from Isreali counterparts ??

Its a problem when we dont speak out on our issues - nobody understands our pain and.

Its a problem when we speak out on our issues - USCIS is offended that we have issues and wants to come hard on us.

What do we do? I am fine with USCIS rejecting or approving my application but reject it or approve it without putting me on hold for 10 years. Is that too much to ask?

It is the resume fakers and document fakers and the rule breakers who should be afraid of reaching out to people. The reason why we are in the mess is because of the greedy employers and ignorant and equally greedy employees. Remember the GREED brought American economy down.

Totally agree - but also remember - it is everybody's greed. During the Y2K days, consulates were approving visas left and right, I there used to be a one page LCA with H1b and I remember those companies were under pressure to bring people in - had clerks doing immigration paperwork in tonnes and then getting approvals at rapid pace.

If immigration always be of same standard - with standard measures to weed out resume fakers and fraud - good people won't get affected.

If someone wants to go back in life and point at things in past - they must go back and see if they always did the right thing.

Thats why I do not fully agree with UN. I agree USCIS are going tough - but not all companies or all immigrants are fraud because they lobbied or because economy is down or because anti immigrants are influencing them

in Paris-Roubaix 2011

NKR

08-05 08:33 AM

The said person should have been aware of what he or she was getting into. Blaming your hardship on other people and trying to get mileage out of it is hardly an honest way............would you agree?

If there's one fact that Americans take for granted, it's that other people want to live here. As President Barack Obama noted in his speech on immigration earlier this week, the U.S. has always attracted strivers from every corner of the globe, often willing to risk great hardships to get here.

During the 20th century especially, America became a magnet for the bright and ambitious. Millions of talented foreigners, from Alfred Hitchcock to Sergey Brin, flocked to our universities and benefited from our financial capital and open culture.

There are signs, however, that the allure of America is fading. A new study by researchers at U.C. Berkeley, Duke and Harvard has found that, for the first time, a majority of American-trained entrepreneurs who have returned to India and China believe they are doing better at "home" than they would be doing in the U.S. The numbers weren't even close: 72% of Indians and 81% of Chinese said "economic opportunities" were superior in their native countries.

Some of the local advantages cited by these global entrepreneurs were predictable: cheap labor and low operating costs. What's more worrisome is that these business people also cited the optimistic mood of their homelands. To them, America felt tapped out, but their own countries seem full of potential. This might also help to explain why the number of illegal immigrants entering the U.S. has plunged more than 60% since 2005.

These trends are troubling because they threaten to undermine a chief competitive advantage of the U.S. Though politicians constantly pay lip service to the importance of American innovation, they often fail to note that it is driven in large part by first-generation immigrants.

Consider some recent data. The U.S. Patent Office says immigrants invent patents at roughly double the rate of non-immigrants, which is why a 1% increase in immigrants with college degrees leads to a 15% rise in patent production. (In recent years, immigrant inventors have contributed to more than a quarter of all U.S. global patent applications.) These immigrants also start companies at an accelerated pace, co-founding 52% of Silicon Valley firms since 1995. It's no accident that immigrants founded or co-founded many of the most successful high-tech companies in America, such as Google, Intel and eBay.

Why is immigration so essential for innovation? Immigrants bring a much-needed set of skills and interests. Last year, foreign students studying on temporary visas received more than 60% of all U.S. engineering doctorates. (American students, by contrast, dominate doctorate programs in the humanities and social sciences.)

These engineering students drive economic growth. According to the Department of Labor, only 5% of U.S. workers are employed in fields related to science and engineering, but they're responsible for more than 50% of sustained economic expansion (growth that isn't due to temporary or cyclical factors). These people invent products that change our lives, and in the process, they create jobs.

But the advantages of immigration aren't limited to those with particular academic backgrounds. In recent years, psychologists have discovered that exposing people to different cultures, either through travel abroad or diversity in their hometown, can also make them more creative. When we encounter other cultures we become more willing to consider multiple interpretations of the same thing. Take leaving food on one's plate: In China, it's often a compliment, signaling that the host has provided enough to eat. But in America it can suggest that the food wasn't good.

People familiar with such cultural contrasts are more likely to consider alternate possibilities when problem-solving, instead of settling for their first answer. As a result, they score significantly higher on tests of creativity. Perhaps it's not a coincidence that many of the most innovative places in the world, such as Silicon Valley and New York City, are also the most diverse.

We need a new immigration debate. In recent years, politicians have focused on border control and keeping out illegal immigrants. That's important work, of course. But what's even more important is ensuring that future inventors want to call America home.

Europe and immigration are vital issues, so let's discuss them (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/8514152/Europe-and-immigration-are-vital-issues-so-lets-discuss-them.html) Telegraph Fewer takers for H-1B The software scene in the US is changing (http://businessstandard.com/india/news/fewer-takers-for-h-1b-/435622/) Business Standard Editorial President Obama's dreaming if he thinks he's mending fences with immigrants (http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/bronx/2011/05/15/2011-05-15_prez_dreaming_if_he_thinks_hes_mending_fences.h tml) By Albor Ruiz | NYDN Twisting the truth on the Mexican border (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/twisting-the-truth-on-the-mexican-border/2011/05/12/AFOJKi3G_story.html) The Washington Post Editorial The Secure Visas Act (http://www.cfr.org/immigration/secure-visas-act/p24959) By Edward Alden | Council on Foreign Relations

2010 Paris-Roubaix 2011 _MG_9232.

-for-paris-roubaix-2011

paskal

04-07 05:27 PM

Can there be a differentiation between extensions/renewals/company changes and new H1bs?

In some sense there already is, since the former are not subject to cap, while the latter are.

So, why not extend the same argument to other situations? Get an LCA and impose all kinds of restrictions on new H-1Bs, but don't apply these on existing H-1Bs, especially if they have had their labors filed.

That way, they don't get rid of existing H1B employees. They only make it harder for new people to get H1bs. Which, it is my understanding, is not our fight.

I agree, new H1b is not our concern..well not directly or immediately. maybe the way to approach this is to ask that a PERM/LC once approved be considered as fulfilling the requirement for any certification needed for the job- in any case if it's the same process, it amounts to useless duplication to keep certifying a job again and again...

What's going on here is that approx there are 500,000 people on H1B visas in this country.

If Anti-H1 crowd propose a bill to throw all of them out, people will laugh at them and ask them to get lost.

So what the anti-H1 crowd has done here is "Slow bleed" as described by admin. Get rid of 8000-10,000 H1Bs out of the country each month. That way, the impact will slow and it wont send any shockwaves. IF existing H1s go to renew their H1 and the new rules apply, half of them wont fit in the new rules of "You cannot do consulting". So they will have to go back.

These guys are trying to do what UK did to Indian and Chinese doctors. They want all of us to go back. Only difference between what UK did to doctors and what these guys want to do to us is that these guys are smarter and they are trying to get this done in slow motion. IF they take Tancredo like approach of "Everyone out, and shut the door", then it wont work.

They have learned from Tancredo's mistake and now have adoped this slow bleed strategy of getting rid of their competition.

Basically, they want the 1990s back. They want to roam in job market with foriegn competition, where even high-school drop-outs can get jobs of $100,000 a year by writing 20 lines of code per week.

Man up you xenophobes. Face the competition and stop being whiny boys running to Grassley and Sessions every time you lose jobs. Get a job and get a life. Unemployment rate is 4.4 %. If you cant find jobs right now, dont blame H1B employees. Something is wrong with you.

Trade groups question new lobbying law (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/trade-groups-question-new-lobbying-law-2007-11-28.html) By Jim Snyder | The Hill, November 28, 2007

Trade groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce say a new lobbying law could require the release of their member lists, violating freedom of association protections granted by the Constitution.

The Chamber, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the American Society of Association Executives wrote Senate Secretary Nancy Erickson and House Clerk Lorraine Miller on Wednesday asking for clarification in how the new law will be applied.

The potential problem relates to a section in the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 that would impose new lobbying disclosure rules.

The trade groups said Congress wrote the section of the law to shine light on so-called �stealth coalitions� that often use innocuous-sounding names to anonymously represent specific industries.

But the imprecision of lobbying definitions in the law could mean disclosure requirements would fall on a variety of trade groups, the groups said in the letter.

Groups that fail to accurately disclose their lobbying activities now will face criminal penalties, the letter also notes.

�The price for being wrong is extremely high,� said Steven Law, senior vice president and chief legal officer for the Chamber.

The letter was signed by Law; Jim Clarke, senior vice president of public policy for the American Society of Association Executives; and Jan Amundson, senior vice president and general counsel at NAM.

The lobbying law, passed in response to scandals surrounding Jack Abramoff and ex-Rep. Randy �Duke� Cunningham (R-Calif.), would require disclosure of any organization or entity that �actively participates in the planning, supervision, or control� in lobbying activities and contributes more than $5,000 per quarter for those efforts.

The �breadth and vagueness of the provision� require further clarification in how the new law will be applied, the letter stated.

The groups noted Supreme Court rulings that they say prohibit the government from forcing groups to disclose their membership without a compelling government interest in doing so.

�We take seriously the constitutional rights of our members to associate freely without government looking over our shoulders,� Law said.

Brett Kappel, a campaign finance and government ethics lawyer, said Congress wrote the provision to target ad-hoc associations that are formed to lobby on a particular issue.

�These typically spring up when there is legislation that would have a major economic impact on a small number of companies from a specific segment of the economy. That�s when they form the Coalition for Apple Pie and Motherhood and lobby against it,� said Kappel, who practices at the firm Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease.

The new law �wasn�t designed to get at trade associations,� he said.

Law said the lobbying law gives the clerk and the secretary broad powers in implementing the new requirements. He said he expected further guidance from those offices by Dec. 10.

hot Paris-Roubaix 2011

Paris-Roubaix 2011

unitednations

07-17 12:19 PM

Hi UN, First of all my sincere gratitude to you for your patience and the time you put in to give a detailed reply to all cases.

Here's my situation(I think a case of status violation)

I did an L1 to H1 transfer in 2005. My L1 was valid till APRIL 2006. So my intention was to work with L1 employer till April 2006 and then switch to H1 employer.

H1 employer also applied for a change of status, which I was not aware of that time. I asked the H1 company's lawyer whether I could continue with my L1 employer after getting the H1 and she said it's fine.

So I got the H1B approval in Oct 2005, but still continued with L1 employer till APRIL 2006, then switched to H1.

Recently I came to know that this could be an issue. When I was filling the G-325A form, I wondered if I specify that I worked with the L1 employer till APRIL 2006, would they catch this?? Even if they catch , how big an issue would this be??

If I put the dates to reflect the dates to show that I quit my L1 employer in Oct 2005 itself, would this be an issue?? I guess in this case, if by any chance they ask for any further evidence like pay stubs or W2 in that period of time, I would be in trouble.

From what I have read from the forum, A lawful re-entry should clear the violation in my case right?? I haven't filed the I-485 yet. My I-140 is pending. Do they catch this during I-140 stage??

ALSO CAN THEY DENY H1B DUE TO PREVIUOS VIOLATION OF STATUS, WHILE I RE-ENTER?? This is my biggest fear now!!!

Can I go to Canada/Mexico for stamping? where would I get an appointment at the earliest??

Thanks.

I am assuming that you haven't left the country since 2005?

Going from h-4 to h-1 or L-1 to H-1b is a gray area in regards to have you actually changed your status and what happens if you maintain your old status.

What is for sure is when you are on F-1 and you file a change of status to h-1b. For sure at this point your status is h-1b.

Some lawyers will tell you that if you continue on L-1 then you have violted your status; others will tell you differently.

Anytime there is a questionable issue then you definitely want to go out and re-enter and get an I-94 card. (use auto revalidation by going to canada). This will take the gray out of it.

Once you have used auto revalidation then tell the absolute truth on the G-325a. USCIS won't be able to do anything about it. However; if they dig into it and accuse you of fraud then you are in for a long and difficult battle.(note: checking status is #1 thing uscis does in examining a 485 application).

The big danger people will have is that regardless of whether people will be able to file now or later; the dates will go backwards. During this retrogressed time; uscis will pre-adjuidcate cases. Therefore, it is possible that they could deny your case but you wouldn't be able to re-file it until the dates have become current again.

On the other hand if some one is attacking me in my home and/or hurting my family or freinds, I have full rights to defend and call for justice to prosecute the attacker, in this case declaring Pakistan a terrorist country.

So you don't consider Kashmir as part of your home. Majority of Indians think Kashmir is part of India.

Where does the boundary of your little world end? I know the boundary starts with you. How big is that world ?

It is so enlightening to learn that you care for people other than yourself.

Studies have shown that lawmakers often ignore and sometimes do not even receive e-mails ginned up by interest groups. Deluged with thousands of essentially identical electronic messages, congressional offices are constantly trying to make it harder for organizations to blast them out.

Now Neil Hare, a former vice president of communications at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, has devised a way around the problem. He just started ISupportThisMessage.com, a Web site that solicits citizens' opinions on political and legislative issues and promises to deliver the results -- on paper -- to every lawmaker's office.

Visitors to the site are invited to "vote" on a variety of issues such as child hunger and presidential candidates. The numbers are tallied and comments compiled for later distribution on Capitol Hill.

"This is a reaction to the failure of e-mailing," Hare said. "We will issue regular reports with our numbers and, over time, Hill staffers will be able to log on and see the results themselves." He said that lobby groups can buy their own spaces on the site for far less than full-blown grass-roots campaigns.

To Conceal Donors, Some Political Groups Look to the Tax Code (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/16/AR2007041601352.html), By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum, Tuesday, April 17, 2007

An increasing number of organizations working to influence elections also are working to hide who is paying for their activities.

Several political organizations colloquially known as 527s are relying more on or switching into 501(c)(4) groups, the type of tax-exempt entity that the tax code uses for advocacy groups.

The 527s must disclose who gives them money; 501(c)(4)s do not have that requirement.

The trend, which was discovered by the nonpartisan Campaign Finance Institute, runs counter to one of the basic tenets of modern-day election law -- broad public disclosure. Voters generally have the right to know who is helping to elect their representatives and senators. Armed with such data, they can decide for themselves who, if anyone, is trying to buy their congressional representatives.

A lot of political influence is at stake if such transformations proliferate. In last year's elections, 527s spent $143.2 million. The biggest outlays on the Democratic side came from the Service Employees International Union, Emily's List and America Votes, a coalition of liberal groups. On the Republican side, the big spenders were the Progress for America Voter Fund, the College Republican National Committee and the Presidential Coalition.

There are many reasons that 527s might want to alter their stripes. The main one has nothing to do with concealment: The Federal Election Commission has been cracking down on 527s, insisting they cannot explicitly press for the election or the defeat of candidates.

But in trying to sidestep the crackdown, several 527s have chosen an alternative structure that is harder for the public to track. Tax-exempt groups of various types have always been able to keep their donors anonymous (except to the Internal Revenue Service). The exception to this, made in 2000, is the type of electioneering funds called 527s, which have to publicly name their contributors.

In recent years, one group that has leaned more heavily on its 501(c)(4) is Progress for America, once one of the largest GOP-leaning 527s. Another group is converting outright: the Club for Growth, which supports conservative, anti-tax candidates. According to a letter obtained by the Campaign Finance Institute, the club sees many benefits in its transformation, including secrecy. "Unlike in the past, your donations to the Club will not be disclosed to the public, except in very limited circumstances," wrote Patrick J. Toomey, the group's president.

Some experts doubt that the Club for Growth will be widely imitated. An organization cannot simply change its label to a 501(c); it must also alter its function so that it no longer primarily works on elections. Last week, Public Citizen, the liberal gadfly, formally complained that Americans for Job Security should not be allowed to operate as a 501(c)(6), or trade association, because of its large-scale electoral involvement.

Veil of Secrecy A sample of entities involved in politics that operate as 501(c), (4), (5) or (6) groups, which are tax-exempt and do not have to disclose their donors publicly.

Organization and Examples of 2006 political activity

AFL-CIO Spent about $40 million on its pro-Democratic political program. Americans for Job Security Ran an estimated $1.5 million in ads on behalf of then-Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.). Chamber of Commerce Spent $10 million on ads thanking largely GOP incumbents for pro-business positions. Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund Spent $1.6 million on election-related activity, including voter education and mobilization. Focus on Family Action Sponsored radio ads in several competitive Senate races. League of Conservation Voters Spent more than $1 million on TV ads, mailings and other political outreach. NARAL Spent more than $740,000, mostly to rent voter lists for Internet communications. National Rifle Association Campaign war chest (excluding PAC funds) was reportedly $9 million.

SOURCE: Campaign Finance Instititue

dresses Paris-Roubaix 2011

Paris-Roubaix 2011 en 11

learning01

05-25 06:57 AM

retrogression is there was no unified voice to atleast speak out, when the serious problems that the legal immigrants are facing was anticipated, write about these issues. Now we have one in IV.

The only problem in what you advocate is this: while each of us is free to speak as we like, that dilutes our focus and produces a gaggle of voices. This results in lack of attention and gradual erosion of the effort. We don't have a full time paid director / administrators to brings things to order. All work here is at IV is voluntary. That's why we need to stop people from promoting Lou Dobbs. Remember, one swallow doen't make a summer.

Also remember: these channels have (or may have) an hidden agenda. Rather than pure news and opinion disseminating channels, they are jockeying to be a opinion influencing channel. That's where they fail; when they can't convince people (how can you, in a few minutes of news coverage), they confuse poeple.

Please do not focus on what Lou Dobbs is saying. If you think this is something that may bring harm to our goals just ignore it. No reason to get rude. Everyone has a right to express his/her opinion. We are in America so we can speak freely. It is all fine. Whatever others do say there is a reason behind it. It is either to support or not to support whatevere is being discussed. Some are very good at chosing the words to blur their intentions. Be smart! Read and conclude. Reply without showing your emotions as those may use against us. This is as simple as that.

I didn't know Narendra Modi is a muslim. I didn't know those are committing genocide in Palestine are muslims. I didn't know those who attacked Iraq and commited war-crime under the pretex of WMD are muslims. I didn't know that these people are muslims.

May be Narendra Modi was born to a Moghul Emperor. Others are born to ottaman emperors. What about you vghc? Are you a product of muslim?

I tried to stay out of this as much as I could. Can't tolerate anymore. Why the hell Narendra Modi is considered as terrorist?

I am not saying every muslim is bad. As I mentioned earlier, few of my best friends are muslims. But why the hell each and every muslim remained silent when people in Sabarmati Express were burnt alive? Hypocrates!

girlfriend Paris-Roubaix 2011 Fabian

Paris-Roubaix 2011 _MG_9302.

riva2005

04-09 11:41 AM

Yes, pete, other people should have hurdles. So when they stumble on those hurdles, it would be your gain.

Its a zero sum game.

We cannot all unite and work on this issue. So let's divide ourselves. Let's split IV into 2 organization, one for EB3 dumbasses who are getting a free ride and didnt go thru the whole 9 yards , and other for smart kids like you and rimzhim.

Let me ask both of you. If you are that smart, how come you are not applying for EB1. I thought researchers would qualify for EB1. Why are you facing difficulty? Could it be that you are not really that good? Because the system does have an HOV lane for scientists to cruise to greencard. Its called EB1. And its current for most categories. What about that?

Why dont you join the fast lane of EB1 and leave the bachelor's degree losers behind who didnt thru the whole 9 yards?